I thought the backlash to General Motors killing Apple CarPlay was bad (albeit understandable on certain levels.) But that was nothing compared to how mad everyone is that the Chevrolet Bolt EV—specifically, the idea of it—is going away now too.
We’ll look at why in today’s morning roundup, and we’ll examine where Honda’s at in the electric race; what happens when China falls out of love with American cars; and how Facebook might be screwing with car dealers. Strap yourselves in, kids! It’s time to get mad about cars online.
The Chevy Bolt Is Dead, But… Why?
I’ll start this post off with some obligatory football-spiking: The Autopian was actually one of the first media outlets to report the demise of the Bolt and Bolt EUV after the 2023 model year. Thank you all for your continued support; showing up bigger, more established competitors is what gets us out of bed in the morning.
But what’s been really interesting is the backlash to this decision. Tributes and eulogies for the Bolt can be found far and wide; I wrote one for Heatmap, The Verge’s gadget guru and Bolt owner Dan Seifer wrote one, Road & Track wrote a good one and called it a “shame,” and Ars Technica points out the utterly baffling outcome that somehow the Jaguar I-Pace (!!!) outlasted the Bolt.
I would’ve lost a lot of money on that bet back in 2018.
And as Electrek—which named the Bolt its car of the year last year—points out, this car was not a failure. Don’t think its cancellation means that it was. The thing was actually doing quite really, really well lately:
The Bolt was the best U.S. selling non-Tesla EV in the first quarter with almost 20,000 sold. Chevy dealers are seeing very long lines for the vehicle, sometimes reaching until the end of the year when GM will cease production.
GM said that 75% of Bolt owners were new to GM, the highest conquest rate for any of its vehicles. At the same time, Bolt owners are among the happiest with 80% saying they would buy another Chevy.
The Bolt is coming off its best-selling year and quarter ever with GM unable to fill demand.
[…] Anecdotally, I own a Bolt EV and 2 older Teslas and my wife and I fight over who gets to take the Bolt every morning. It is a pleasure to drive, has great Wireless CarPlay/Android Auto connectivity, great sound system, great visibility, quick pickup and smart handling.
Hell of a car to kill off, GM. I don’t want to say this has the same level of EV1 vibes because that’s a different situation.
Here’s the thing: Cars get discontinued all the time. The Bolt was very good, but its tech was getting old. It couldn’t fast-charge on the level of newer competitors, and GM’s got a bunch of new EVs planned on its next-gen Ultium hardware/software and homegrown batteries. So it goes.
The problem here is that GM seemingly has nothing in the pipeline to replace the Bolt, a small, cheap, high-range EV. In fact, nobody does. The Nissan Leaf is about to join the Bolt in Car Heaven too. The Tesla Model 3 is getting super affordable, but it’s not crossing into that $20,000 range yet. GM points you to the Equinox EV, and if it can pull off that $30,000-before-incentives price, it’ll be good—but not as cheap as the Bolt and a hell of a lot bigger.
What are we supposed to do if we want an affordable, compact EV? No car company seems willing to step up there; in America, our market is $60,000 trucks and SUVs financed over eleventy-billion years at double-digit interest rates. That’s going to carry over into the electric era too. And then everybody wonders why the repo business is booming. Moreover, I wonder what happens to municipal and corporate fleets now that the Bolt’s gone. I hope to look more into that this week.
It’s all baffling. Even if GM needed to move on from the Bolt’s outdated hardware, the car did prove there’s demand for something smaller and more affordable in this space. The idea that an automaker just doesn’t want to make it, possibly because the obscene profit margins won’t be there, is tough.
Anyway, RIP to the Bolt, a real one. It’s nice to see such tributes for a car that was often (wrongly) derided as an also-ran behind the sexier Model 3. It’ll be missed. Clearly.
What Happens When China Eats America’s Lunch?
You know which automakers are building cheap, affordable EVs? Chinese ones.
The big through-line from last week’s Auto Shanghai show is that China’s homegrown auto industry is advancing rapidly, and its “foreign” brands from Western and other Asian countries are quickly losing relevance and market share.
This is very bad news for those automakers, who considered China to be a golden goose that would lay eggs endlessly for them. Let’s take GM, for example. China has been its biggest market for years, accounting for 22% of GM’s global sales in 2022. But that market share has been on the decline since the mid-2010s when it peaked at around 15%.
That’s a lot of money about to be lit on fire. The smart take on this trend comes from Insider’s Alexa St. John and Nora Naughton, who talk to Ford CEO Jim Farley about what’s happening too:
“The market has totally changed,” Jim Farley, the CEO of Ford, told reporters at a Thursday charity event in Detroit. “We’re going to have to rethink what the Ford brand means in a place like China.”
That’s especially true as EVs take center stage, Farley said, noting that he has learned the luxury brands that sell only electric vehicles do best in Chinese markets.
Chinese EV-maker market share in China rose by 17% in 2022, while that of foreign automakers dropped by 11%. Some of this can be attributed to Chinese car companies’ ability to build better and cheaper cars, especially EVs, that consumers are keen to buy.
“It’s pretty much the consensus belief that the US automakers are increasingly irrelevant” in China, Edison Yu, an analyst at Deutsche Bank, told Insider.
“As we make this transition to EV, the GMs, the Fords in China will really have to be very bold and aggressive to find success,” Yu said. “At some point, there needs to be either a decision to continue or to pull out… We’re at a point where one does need to make a decision on their future.”
Pull out? Good Lord. That sentence would’ve been unfathomable even a few years ago.
I’ve cited this anecdote before here, but I remember a conversation with one European brand’s auto executive a few years ago who said China would mean endless growth because it was making new millionaires every single day. (I guess they don’t teach in business schools that up-and-to-the-right growth forever is impossible.)
But beyond that, I’m not sure the auto industry ever really counted on China catching up as hard and fast as it has. Granted, that often came from those joint ventures with foreign companies, which have been required by Chinese law; they learned how to make cars from us as they built up their own local supply chains.
Now they’re expanding into Europe, and it’s just the start. It’s like the opposite of Vegas now:Â “What happens in China will not stay in China,” Bill Russo, the CEO of Automobility, told Insider in January.
Honda Wants To ‘Fight Back’ And Folks, We Are Here For It
“Do you have any good news for me today, PG?”, you may now be asking. “Or just doom and gloom?” Fair! But I don’t make the news, I just tell you what’s going on. Now, here is something a little more positive.
A week after Toyota’s new CEO outlined its strategy to get ahead on EVs, Honda is doing the same. Both companies are guilty of lagging on battery-powered cars to focus on hydrogen and hybrids, and while those are important, the events in China are one of a thousand reasons they need to get it together. This is exactly what Honda’s CEO vows to do now, reports Automotive News:
The pivot point, Mibe said, starts in 2025. That’s when Honda launches its new dedicated EV platform for midsize cars in North America. The following year, it rolls out its in-house software ecosystem to drive new revenue from things like apps and subscription services. The plans also call for next-generation batteries, including solid-state batteries; a huge EV manufacturing hub in Ohio; and overhauling the entire manufacturing process to be “totally different from a conventional automobile production line,” Mibe said.
This is exciting news. If Toyota’s not to be underestimated on the manufacturing front, Honda is the same when it comes to innovation and engineering. Historically, this company is always at its best when it’s an upstart taking on bigger competitors, and hitting back twice as hard when it gets knocked down.
Innovation will be key. As with Toyota, the whole “we’ll do our own software and batteries and make you pay for apps” thing is basically what every other OEM wants to do. The difference is the Japanese are a few years behind a bunch of others, including GM, Ford and Tesla—to say nothing of the giants rising out of China.
In fact, China is what’s spooking Japan to stop resting on its laurels, and Honda’s execs said as much:
The CEO outlined the vision on Wednesday while giving Honda’s annual business briefing. Mibe said Honda executives had an unpleasant surprise at this month’s Shanghai auto show.
Local Chinese brands flooded the exhibition hall with sophisticated, advanced EVs of all kinds. As COO Shinji Aoyama put it, “We were overwhelmed by the Chinese.”
Meta Messes With Dealers
Having spent my career in media, I can’t say I have a lot of love for Facebook (or Meta, as its parent company is now called.) Throughout the last decade, it went like this: Facebook makes big promises for audience returns if you just invest a ton in paid ads, or live video, or regular video, or Instant Articles, or whatever bullshit it was pimping that month, only to inevitably change its mind and pull the plug after whole business plans were made around these platforms. Then come the layoffs.
It’s like a heroin dealer who sells you drugs, then calls the cops on you, but still says “See you next week, yeah?”
Great news, car dealers: You’re next on Facebook’s list. Now, the platform won’t let car dealers post on Facebook Marketplace via a Facebook Business page. They have to pay for ads there instead.
Meta’s Facebook Marketplace is enforcing new restrictions on vehicle listings that appear designed to push car dealers toward paid advertising, and the change is creating an uneven early impact.
Everybody who’s worked in digital media for the past few years:
Now, some dealers are a little spooked. One shop told Automotive News that “10 to 15 percent of its used sales come through Facebook Marketplace,” which is surprisingly high. Others said that they never really depended on the platform too much, or got wise to it early on when they noticed too many other dealers were there too, saturating the market (another media parallel!)
Anyway, dealers, my advice is to never get too addicted to any one third-party platform you don’t directly control. Things have a weird way of blowing up in your face when you do. But good luck to Meta in the meantime; they need tons of revenue to fund that “Metaverse” bullshit where we all have meetings looking like characters from a third-rate Sims knockoff. Oh wait, no, it’s AI now! What a dumb company.
Your Turn
Who should step up to make affordable, compact EVs? I’d love to see Honda pull this off. There’s clearly a need for something Bolt-sized and Bolt-priced. If the established automakers don’t pull this off, you can bet BYD will figure it out sooner or later.
I see good advice about not relying on one 3rd party. Then you basically do that with Chinese EVS. So pretty EVs at a Chinese car show. No touchee no drivee look pretty. I know low standards and slave labor can save a buck but i doubt you can get US standards on a regular basis from slave labor. Heck if you cant get an overpaid union work force to take pride in what they build how are you going to motivate underfed slavez?
Why don’t you ask the America, the world’s leader of prison slave labor:
Thirteenth Amendment:
Section 1
Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
Section 2
Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/amendment-13/
US prison population: 505/100,000 for a total of 1767200
Communist China prison population: 119/100,000 for a total of 1690000
https://www.prisonstudies.org/highest-to-lowest/prison-population-total?field_region_taxonomy_tid=All
https://news.uchicago.edu/story/us-prison-labor-programs-violate-fundamental-human-rights-new-report-finds
What about the Mini EV?
He said ‘affordable’
Too expensive and not enough range to be in the same conversation.
RE Chevy Bolt…
“You really did it Mary..
You lead…
And that’s what matters”
GM again stops production of a popular affordable car.
Golf clap to GM yet again shooting themselves in the dick
Mary reminds you that she has no dick, so it’s fine.
Chinese Chicken Tax anyone? I just hope a full on trade war doesn’t ensue. The economic ties are what keep China in check.
I think Tesla is in the best position to make an affordable EV. They have the know-how and are willing to throw convention away in order to accomplish a goal.
Something around $20k, that seats 4-5, has adequate trunk space, gets at least 200 miles range real-world U.S. driving(The BYD Seagull in all likelihood does not in spite of its Chinese specs indicating more range. It probably would if it had much better aero), and does 0-60 mph in under 7 seconds is very doable with mostly 1st world labor.
The battery pack must be kept small to be this affordable, somewhere around 25-30 kWh, which necessitates better streamlining. The 1996 Solectria Sunrise had a Cd of 0.17, the 2000 GM Precept had a Cd of 0.163, the 1985 Ford Probe V had a Cd of 0.137, the 2020 GAC ENO.146 had a 0.146, so it is doable. A frontal area of around 2.1 m^2 is perfectly adequate for a comfortable car that can fit at least 4 grown adults at the same time, as that would be comparable in size to a classic Mercedes W123 or W126. Such a car could come in at under 3,000 lbs while meeting current U.S. safety standards, which would help with both performance and efficiency. In fact, if they simply used the base Model 3’s drive system, and geared it for a lower top speed(say, 100 mph), it would readily out perform it and offer a lot of acceleration for the money, perhaps 0-60 mph in the mid 4-second range.
Call it the Model 2, and they’d eventually have a 2 S3XY Cyber Roadster lineup.
Theoretically Tesla could do it with a 200 mile range, why they haven’t done it already is beyond me. No one ever believed EMs $35k promise, they could of done a $25k car 5 years ago easily, just don’t fill it with autopilot BS. Reason why they didn’t do it, because they don’t have to, they have been selling every $60-100k EV they made up to this point, with profit margins of $10-30k a piece.
2 S3XY Cyber Roadster Semi
Would of loved a Probe V*, aero is so key to attempt to go quickly & efficiently
*hell at this point I’d love to just see one in person
If I’d have been in charge of Ford in the 1980s, the Probe V would have been the next Mustang, except it would have been made RWD. Imagine a 5.0 V8 getting close to 50 mpg highway, and hitting 190 mph with all of 200 horsepower.
Ha oh yes, I’m old enough to remember how the Probe was supposed to replace the Mustang
Then (If I’m remembering correctly) the Probe was going to be produced along side of the Mustang bc while the Probe concept design had a lot of interest much like the 924 & 928 couldn’t replace the 911 bc too many people cried out to Keep the Mustang(ness?) Intact & the Probe prototype was way too futuristic to be the new mustang… so then the Mustang Mach III prototype came out and the Mustang afficianotos deemed it to be good (or good enough) to be the new mustang, the prod. version of which was the generation that followed the fox body & came about in… (1996?)
What was of greater offense than the Probe production car’s design being touted as a Mustang replacement, was that it was a 4 or 6 cylinder, with front wheel drive. If anything, I think that is what angered Mustang fans.
I’d have given the aficionados a vehicle with the dynamics they wanted, an emphasis on hoonable performance while retaining RWD and having a 5.0 V8 option, WHILE not watering down the futuristic look by going all-in on aerodynamics, aiming for a Cd value similar to the prototypes, and not the 0.3X value that the production Probe had. After all, what’s the point of styling the car all futuristic if you’re not going to derive any performance benefit from doing so?
It would have ended up being one of the fastest production cars on Earth at the time, RWD, relatively inexpensive to purchase, and would have been a halo car for fuel economy, all at the same time. The potential was there. 200 horsepower can go a very long way with aerodynamics that slippery, and I think a 190-ish mph top speed for the 5.0 V8 would have grown on the fanbase, especially if it was for less than Corvette money. Even an 88 horsepower 2.3L 4-cylinder could have been geared for somewhere around 145 mph top end, and reached it, and for less than half of Corvette money, even if the 0-60 mph would have been abysmal for this variant(The 4cyl of the era did 0-60 mph in what, 13 seconds?), that top speed coupled with CRX-beating fuel economy and highway acceleration comparable to more powerful cars(due to drag reduction) might have printed money, especially if the 5.0 was able to fuck around with Lambos and Ferraris for an amount of money in reach of the average Joe.
With Chevy and Nissan exiting that market segment, it really does leave the door open for the rumored Model 2. Tesla is probably the only automaker who could make money on a car in that price range. Chevy may regret not making a Bolt sized vehicle on the Ultium platform. I understand killing the name but they could name an Ultium platform car the Spark EV or Sonic EV.
Tesla is a luxury car manufacturer.
Maybe they could sell the design to Dodge, who loves selling cars designed a decade ago or longer.
GM killing the Bolt makes a ton of sense. Keeping it going while innovating Ultium means the factory turns into a time capsule that’s impossible to upgrade. Like Lordstown. Someone remembered that fiasco and decided not to repeat it. Among other things like the Bolt being a glorified city car with its slow DCFC.
I’d be curious to know if the death of the Bolt isn’t coming from the battery supplier side of things (LG, right?).
If LG (or whoever) doesn’t want to manufacture the Bolt’s batteries any more or Chevy doesn’t want to commit to the order volume that would keep the battery production line profitable, then that’s the death of the Bolt right there.
It seems pretty clear that there wasn’t going to be a gen2 Bolt, Ultium or otherwise, so when the supply of batteries runs out, the supply of Bolts does too.
Dealers are just spam for people like me. Craigslist did it the right way and just has a separate check box to omit dealers. Then others who are actually shopping for that deceptively priced and possibly repo’d Camry can still find it.
You joking? I quit using CL because the dealership spam was so bad. I’d search for things like “199* Acura Integra” and get like 10 pages of minivans and crossovers.
Why end the Bolt instead of updating it’s hardware or software or whatever? I find it very odd that GM would brag about Bolt sales and then cancel the model line on basically the same day. They have a chance to own the affordable EV marketplace in the US, at least for awhile, why wouldn’t they do that? Also, I’m having trouble drumming up any sympathy for automakers and their China conundrum. Sorry guys, back to reality for you!
Because it is built on the bones of a design that is 10 years old.
I’m sure they’ve run the numbers and the business case just isn’t there. Not enough margin at that price point.
Model S joins the chat…
I’m all for dealers getting kicked off FB Marketplace. Especially BHPH style ones who put the advertised price as the down payment. I don’t care about $3k down to buy a 2019 Cherokee, I’m trying to search for cheap XJ’s damnit.
GM killing off the Bolt is to me like BMW stopping the i3, eventually you would imagine they could be profitable. Both great options that we’re killed to focus on the newer more expensive and perhaps profitable new release EVs. BMW has the i4, i7, & iX with i5 on the way, but a cheaper i3 replacement is supposedly coming after getting suckers to buy a $60-100k EV.
What Happens When China Eats America’s Lunch?
When China eats America’s lunch, they won’t be hungry an hour later.
COTD
Could have started the answer with “Confucius say:”
Hopefully, they have a replacement small car with a CATL sourced sodium battery. That would be cheaper to make as the battery costs are a lot less.
Of course if it has a CATL sourced battery it won’t get some or all of the Fed rebate.
The Bolt’s limitation was the charging. The slower charging was a direct result of GM using a smaller gauge wire to save money. One that could be rectified fairly easily. A small update could make this vehicle live on. I believe they could expand the Bolt line as their inexpensive electric vehicle line.
GM wants the Bolt to die. It was built for one reason, an attempt to capture some of the Tesla stock price magic. Look, we’re GM, we made a cheap EV, we are innovative. Look, look, oh please please buy some GM stock.
100% the Bolt was rushed to market in 2017/18 specifically for Mary to try to grab some headlines / bragging rights.
GM (along with many other legacy autos) are seeing the results of following decades of MBA & consultants advice to outsource everything possible. Think about what ‘value add’ really exists that was added by GM to this product? I.e. what did GM actually do/make of the Bolt? Overall product design, marketing, body shell & panels, maybe financing (as an option for customers) and thats it. Everything about this vehicle was outsourced to their 2nd & 3rd tier suppliers, this just as well should have been called the LG Bolt brought to you by GM
My commute is much shorter and more direct in Tucson Arizona, than my previous Boston based one.
I used to rack up 20k+ per year on cars moving just myself and a backpack into the city from nearby New Hampshire.
The correct vehicle to move that amount of goods and people those distances is a Motorcycle, but riding two wheels into and out of Boston sounds like suicide.
My ‘daily’ is a trail prepared and used Jeep Wrangler, but at 15mpg, it doesn’t make environmental or financial sense to drive it the 10 miles to, and 10 miles back from work every day.
At 60+ mpg, my $5000 Yamaha makes much more sense.
We’ll see how committed to this plan I am in June and August…
Adding an electric car to the rotation is a good idea in theory, but with the spreading HOA infection in this country, parking becomes an issue when you have multiple vehicles for multiple purposes.
The correct vehicle to carry you 10 miles to and 10 miles back would be an electric bicycle but its likely not possible with Tuscon infrastructure.
Tucson has one of the best infrastructure for bikes in the US. Plus one of the largest races too
When did they install the air-conditioned bike tunnels? Because riding, even with electric assistance, a bike in Tucson in July and August sun is not an option for any creature without a water-filled hump embedded in their back.
E Bikes are indeed an excellent option in the area for stuff within the city limits, and the infrastructure and bike lanes do support it pretty well.
The outer suburbs and residential communities however tend to be linked with highways or high speed limit “Strodes”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ORzNZUeUHAM
Trying to ebike or road bike along one of these enters back into the realm of unreasonable risk. Purely in town however, an ebike would be a great solution.
1g Insights can be had for 3-5k, have air conditioning, fun to drive, and get 60+mpg. Just sayin.
Also available with 5MT….
DT mentioned that GM has the worlds best engineering, if only they had anything close to that in management. I heard when the Bolt first came out that it was going to morph into its own brand with a family of vehicles (small city van & small pickup). This of course never happened. Way to throw away some good momentum.
There are 2 parties in every transaction. Cheap EVs are great for the consumer, but don’t make money for the manufacturer. The Bolt is losing money on every sale, so with sales rising it is not baffling at all that GM wants to stop the bleeding. EVs are supply-limited right now, the government is helping people buy them, and the poors don’t buy new cars. Making a cheap EV in this market is a suckers bet.
Do you have a citation that shows its still losing money on each Bolt sale after all these years? I had not read they are still not profitable.
https://www.inverse.com/article/32239-why-gm-loses-money-chevy-bolt#:~:text=The%20Chevrolet%20Bolt%2C%20General%20Motors,struggling%20to%20turn%20a%20profit.
Surely GM has gotten more efficient at making them but they have also lowered the price. Factoring in the recalls, they have to be losing money.
That is a 6 year old article not not really great but yes factoring in the recall it likely cost them profitability which makes canceling it even crazier unless they see another issue with the platform.
GM did not foot the vast majority of the bill for the recall. LG did, because it was LG’s mistake. The only concern for GM with the recall was if it would affect brand perception, and since they’re selling every Bolt they can that doesn’t seem to have been a problem.
GM has been asked repeatedly by large institutional investors on earnings calls if the Bolt is profitable. Especially around when they slashed prices. They have flat out refused to answer that question. This is basically an admission that it is not. Manufacturers don’t dodge profitability questions when the answer is yes.
The most recent time they went on record was when Bara admitted the bolt wasn’t profitable near the end of 2019. Since then they have only invested in R&D for the new platform so its unlikely they’ve shaved any costs off the Bolt. Also, they slashed the bolt price, by a lot.
Ueah but R&D, AND equipment investmemts have to been covered so just build costs to cover. That has to 40% less cost right there.
There was little to zero r&d for three Bolt, which was a maximum ‘catalog engineering’ product. The only physical thing GM manufacturers for this product is the body shell & panels which is why they loose money on each sold
Typical business model of General Motors to kill the vehicles as soon as they got less and less shitty with each passing year. Nothing to see…
GM has great engineers and occasionally some exotic animal will escape the lab. But make no mistake, the bean counters have pith helmets and elephant guns. GM has been consistent for decades about killing cars with bad profit margins – Corvair, Fiero, EV1, Volt, Bolt, small cars, mainstream sedans.
I just don’t understand the lack of affordable new vehicles. It seems so shortsighted. These $50,000+ cars financed 7+ years can’t keep going like this, can they? I mean, where/when does the bottom fall out? The switchover to EVs means even MORE expensive cars? Damn.
I’m rocking a paid off 2016 Mazda6 and my wife has a 2016 Mazda CX-5 (also soon to be paid off) and I honestly don’t know what we’d do if something tragic happened to either and we had to replace them. Take out a big ass car loan, I guess. Sounds fun…not. Because even used cars (and EVs) are asinine as far as price.
The lack of affordable entry-level vehicles is absolutely understandable. Manufacturers don’t make any money on them, and the vast majority of consumers don’t wish to purchase them!
The new entry level vehicle is a used one. Short of a massive, global, depression-level economic downturn we’re never going back to the previous paradigm.
Have you seen used prices lately? Those aren’t entry level vehicles anymore.
Which makes me think that maybe new cars won’t depreciate as much as in the the before-times? Maybe it’s okay to finance a more expensive car if buyers a) keep it for longer and b) residual value is higher when you sell it?
There is a lack of awareness around these parts. The market has changed. Cars are status symbols now more than ever. You can escape whatever mediocre job/house/life you have when you sit in a nice car. When you pull up in that premium car you are just the same as ritchy rich in the same car next to you, even if just for a moment.
People have put aside a nice home or saving for retirement and want to feel special NOW and they can have that in a nice car.
More like that nice home or saving for retirement is an impossibility for most, even those of above average income. The CPI’s hedonic adjustments have hidden the real rate of inflation from everyone. An hour of work buys about 1/3 of what it did 50 years ago, in terms of big ticket items like homes, college educations, and healthcare. That nice car is accessible on credit, just sign the dotted line for an 8 year payment plan, and hope you never lose your job or some economically significant tragedy doesn’t befall you in the interim.
Mass repos of used cars incoming.
I wouldn’t say vast majority of consumers. There are plenty of people who absolutely desire an affordable new car. There just aren’t enough out there and dealerships push people into more expensive cars. I bought a new Jetta two years ago and it was a struggle to get the place to actually accept money for it. They kept telling me I really wanted an SUV. I had to walk out for them to actually decide to sell me the car.
Buying a $50,000 vehicle is definitely shortsighted for the consumer. And yes, in the long run, it might be shortsighted for the manufacturers also if economic or political conditions change. But that is American style capitalism. Rake in the bucks, retire with a golden pension, leave the mess for the next guy, and it it goes too far off the rails, the government will bail them out.
The shift away from entry-level vehicles is not exclusively a US phenomenon. Sure, you can get stripped down, manual transmission vehicles with hand-crank windows in developing economies, but in first world markets consumer demand has shifted sharply upmarket.
There are affordable cars hitting the market, they’re just not cars people like here.
GM has 2 new/redesigned sub-$25k cars (Trax & Envista) for 2024, but they’re turbo 3-cylinder crossovers and everyone made fun of the Buick last week for being slow.
Honda dropped LX trims for a time, but that seems more obviously now a move that was meant to conserve some parts in the supply chain for the more profitable trims, as LX trims are returning to different models (while they’re still having to drop blind-spot monitors on loaded trims). But even a Civic LX is ~$25k. An HR-V is the same price and a plain CVT crossover, but that’s as big as a CR-V was many years ago. Both slow, but also free of any turbo complications.
For less than either and for better efficiency, Toyota has the Corolla Hybrid for $24k – about the same as the Prius was ~10-15 years ago, in both MPG (maybe higher even) and price without adjusting for inflation.
I don’t want any of those cars either, but I can think of several non-car people that I could see recommending them to. And honestly, I think most non-car people I know are more in tune to the state of the market right now. I know several that have been passively in the market for a couple years and know it’s not a great time to buy, and have been holding out or only bought something because they needed to (families with space requirements, totaled vehicles, etc).
Not mentioned much amongst the weeping and gnashing of teeth has been to me the key question:
Was the Bolt profitable for GM? Has any cheap EV been profitable for any non-Chinese automaker (and I have my doubts about those as well)?
If GM only sells the Bolt at a loss to gain EV experience and to help it meet corporate emissions/MPG standards, then it’s no more than a more successful version of the compliance cars of a decade plus ago.
Batteries are expensive. Everything is expensive. $30K is the new $20K. Commenters who remember sub $10K new cars don’t like to hear it, but I don’t think they should hold their breath hoping for new EVs in the $20s before tax credits.
The other thing that always seems to go unmentioned is that very very very few people (who are extremely overrepresented on sites like this) actively seek out cheap, small, or base model vehicles. Most who historically bought them did so out of necessity, not love for the concept. Since used cars last longer than ever, and electrification virtually eliminates the cheaper running costs of a small vehicle, fewer people than ever feel as though they have to settle for a brand new small car. It’s not surprising that they’re going away, as much as nobody here ever likes to hear it.
I was going to ask the same thing. Is it even possible for US, European, or Japanese automakers to build a profitable “Bolt”.
I’d love a Toyota or Honda “Bolt”. I would have considered the Chevy Bolt if the time was right to buy a new commuter car, and that might be the only vehicle in their lineup I’d buy except the scenario where I have new Corvette money.
But if the cars just can’t be built without going in the red, I understand why they aren’t being developed.
If it’s possible, it’s going to be through platform sharing (aka the Equinox dismissively referred to in the article). It will be a bit more expensive, but remember, the Bolt was $37,500 to start in 2016 dollars. That’s likely more than what the Equinox will cost in 2024 dollars, and the Equinox will presumably be profitable at that price point. The fact that it’s larger while being just as cheap to run will be seen as a virtue by the majority of its customers, and as a downside only by urban car enthusiast weirdos who wouldn’t buy it new anyways.
The typical buyers of cheap, small new cars are also not necessarily the same people that have the ability to make an electric vehicle their sole vehicle. Not without a change to infrastructure. Yes there’s the very real concern about the electrification push meaning lower-income folks get squeezed on gas and taxes, but both options seem liable to do that.
I get the people saying “I don’t want an Equinox!” but that’s the segment that’s also the heart of the market and in a better position to grab more potential EV buyers. I won’t be surprised if the Equinox doesn’t hit the $30k target they initially quoted, but I think GM will feel satisfied if they beat the ID.4 in price. Even Toyota which the subject of them being slow in EV adoption often comes up, the bZ4x is a similar size too.
A number of people mention that after adding an EV like the Leaf, Bolt, etc. to the household, it becomes the primary family runabout for most daily driving. But the OEMs would clearly rather the EV become the main family car period – the Kia EV9 being a good example.
Very good point that I wish I had thought of myself. I have no idea if this data exists somewhere, but I would wager the income of a typical Bolt buyer is much higher than the income of a buyer of pretty much any other $27,000 vehicle.
There is room for the Equinox and the Bolt on the same lot. Plus, you get conquest sales looking at a Bolt, the salesman puts on their best plaid jacket, and goes “well if you’re going to have kids you’re going to want the space of the Equinox…”
The old adage was a car for every purse and purpose. Do we have that anymore?
Yes, on the used side of the lot.
It used to be that if you had a small budget and needed something that would last a decade and get 35-40 mpg, you needed a brand new Geo Metro or CRX or whatever.
Now, you can get any size of hybrid sedan and most sizes of hybrid SUVs on the used market that meet those criteria. With EVs, the running cost difference is even smaller. So why settle for the subcompact?
The problem with the used side of the lot is that, in normal times, there are advantages to buying new. More time in warranty, better interest rates (though this has faded hard), fewer surprises from the previous owner.
As for “settling” for the subcompact, there are reasons beyond price to buy one instead. I’m a single guy who will never create children who lives in an urban area with some very awkward parking at my apartment. Getting the bigger car would make my life actively worse. Is that everyone? Of course not, hence every purse and purpose.
And you can still buy small vehicles new, just fewer of them, and more that are vaguely CUV shaped. But their sales figures should tell you something.
The Bolt I think is a special case, because of battery costs. The BOM cost per unit likely doesn’t scale with size as easily for EVs as for gas cars. So it is genuinely hard to make a profitable, small EV.
Sales figures for compacts and subcompacts have always been relatively low – they’re as much about getting people on the lot as they are about selling a car. The sheer amount of conquest sales are more important than actual numbers posted – if satisfied Bolt buyers get pregnant and upgrade the car has value.
Also subcompact CUVs are horrible if you’re a man who is mostly leg. I might have an unconventional build but upright seating positions are a menace.
“So why settle for the subcompact?”
Parking, especially in carports and small garages.
Sure, but the tech is evolving rapidly, the Bolt is on the “old” side now and its closest cheap-EV competitor the Leaf is also reportedly being dumped in a year or two. Both of those models saw steep price cuts in the last couple years, they didn’t start at these prices.
It doesn’t mean they’ll never re-enter the segment once more mainstream models are out. Especially if the rules and regs on what qualifies, tax breaks etc. ever settle down.
If GM Could make a decent profit margin on each Bolt sold, then yes I agree this strategy could work.
However since they loose money on each one… of course they are going to are it from the line up entirely
This is the thing everyone misses. No one doubts there is demand for a vehicle like the Bolt, but can that demand be met at a profit? If the figure I heard today that 20% of vehicles sold worldwide are going to be EV this coming year, they have to be profitable. You can sell a niche car at a loss. You can’t sell a mainstream vehicle at a loss.
This is the fundamental issue. When new cars were $20k, wages were X. Now that new cars are $30k, wages are very much NOT 1.5X. Until this is solved, we are fucking doomed.
This – “if we increase minimum wage everything else will also get more expensive!” then everything got more expensive anyway.
Exactly, cause people have more money. Snake eating it’s tail, for sure. But, there was a time when CEO’s were NOT fiduciarily obligated to protect the shareholder as aggressive as they do now. Isn’t a profit enough? Does it HAVE to be maximized to the extreme?
Alas, this is only going to get worse.
A Mirage can be profitably sold at $16K, while a Bolt that fills basically the same niche can’t be for $27K. Guess which one is being legislated out of existence?
The only auto manufacturers (that I know of*) making a profit on their EV models are…
TESLA (who os making +20% on each unit)
BYD and Axios
In Tesla & BYDs case, they both have excellent product development integration business model
I don’t know enough about Axios
Yes at least in other markets (notably in China) there are many EV models available for less than equilivant of $20k, though besides BYD (worlds largest battery manufacturer) and Axios the other (literally hundreds) of Chinese Auto manufacturers are fearcely competing w/each other on price in a desperate attempt to gain markets hare & survive the Chinese auto market consolidation that is coming, in part bc that’s what Ping & thr CCP wants as they too see consolidation necessary
“Row of Cars at a Car Dealership”, my favorite!
The legacy manufacturers have chosen to not compete in the affordable car market… for now. But when everything likely goes tits-up a la 2008, we’ll probably see a few companies make the effort to federalize models that they already sell overseas. If not, it’ll probably be bailout time!
I know I, and others are skeptical about the success of Chinese brands here, but if they introduce something that genuinely undercuts our ridiculously high price of entry car market at the right time, watch out. People are going to be willing to take chances when they’ve been laid off, took a far shittier job to survive, and simply need something to commute in. Suddenly the brodozer that costs a grand a month to run in payments fuel and insurance becomes a life-liability, and that $300/month Chinese EV looks pretty freaking good.
Bring back Cash for Clunkers! You know Cash for ICE is definitely in our future to get people into EVs.
It’s a terrible idea, but I have no doubt they will try it.
That just adds cost to the EV. It aint free just because the government lends you the money. And a tax incentive is just that a loan actually a loan shark loan. Government is in the red. They get offered another 1.5 trillion to spend and they turn up their noses and say not enough.
Yeah, the Chinese are poised to kick the US OEMs right in the nuts just like the Japanese did in the 70’s. The sound of cash falling out of people’s pockets drowned out those old WWII vets yelling about buying from ‘the enemy’.
And they’ll have a much easier time of it, not only is our market already fully primed to embrace imports now, but Chinese immigrants and Chinese culture have had a far more visible impact on the entirety of the United States, vs Japanese, who were more concentrated in specific areas, we already buy everything from China, and we’ve never had a direct shooting war with China (just proxy wars, eg, Ukraine), and Chinese made cars of various sorts have already been sold here, going back about 14-15 years. Our market is wide open for them to take, if they want it.
We should sell framed prints in the merch store.
If I didn’t immediately buy it, it’s because it would be on my Christmas list.
What’s gonna happen to the Dominos fleet of Bolts?
(Don’t talk shit about Dominos, it’s perfectly acceptable cheap pizza)
Also, no the cheap subcompact Chinese EV’s aren’t going to be taking over here in America. By the time you factor in crash testing, EPA compliance, taxes, import costs, and tariffs, they’re not going to be cheap anymore.
Dominos is delicious, delicious trash. I’m a fan, even though I feel pretty sick every time I eat it. It beats the hell out of Pizza Hut, which makes me very sick and also sucks.
Also you’re right that even if the Chinese EV’s make it to market here, protectionist legislation will make sure that they can’t undercut by much. It’s unlikely the federal government is going to allow the Chinese to sell a 15k EV.
I’m certainly not rooting for China, but it will sort of suck when that legislation reinforces manufacturer’s desire to only make more and more expensive cars.
The government supports over priced union labor and the chinese use slave labor yeah those damn OEM Manufacturers are to blame.
The recent articles about Tesla “stiffing” Chinese factory workers said they average $14k/year in salary. That is a lot of breathing room versus an American (even non-union), European, or Japanese auto worker.
Domino’s gives me PTSD because one of their drivers, a notorious stop sign ignorer, killed my late, beloved 2013 Elantra GT, which would be paid off by now had it lived.
How different my life could have been!
If only I could give you a hug emoji.
As someone who has had many Elantra hatches/wagons in his life, I am so sorry for your loss (typically underrated cars).
I too would wince at the Dominos logo.
Dominos isn’t that cheap. Little Caesars, now — that’s cheap and acceptable for the price.
When your choice of pizza advertises what their delivery cars are insyead of anything about their pizza you know it is not a good substitute.
I’d love to see Honda do it too mostly because I would hope they brought over the Honda e. I know it would never happen but it would be a perfect commuter car for me.
Agree. I’d love to drive a Honda e, but I feel it needs a new name.
I’d be fine with Honda ERX
“ERX” is one of the sounds I make when I smash my finger with something.
But yeah, that Honda E is a great looking cheerful little automobile. It has the same friendly face as the Rivian cargo van.
Easy for the Chinese to undercut everyone now that they all left the cheapest car segments.
A new EV priced in the teens, perhaps even a gas-powered car under 10k, or possibly even a new EV that cheap.
GM recently said that the no Apple Carplay/Android Auto only affected *new* EV models to be released, like the Equinox EV, and that existing models would still have AA/CP. So just a few weeks later, they kill off the Bolt! Surprised?
Honda made a mistake by not selling the E over here.