NICK POPE
CONTRIBUTOR
American automakers will need to make major changes to their businesses if they want to remain competitive with Chinese electric vehicles (EVs) poised to flood the global market, according to analysis published by auto industry consultants.
U.S. manufacturers currently do tens of billions of dollars of business abroad, but Chinese competitors are poised to take over approximately one-third of the global market share by 2030 with particularly strong growth in Europe, South America and Asia driven by EVs and plug-in hybrids, AlixPartners projects in its report.
The auto market is evolving to favor EVs thanks in part to the policy choices of the Biden administration and other Western governments, and the consultancy concludes that American firms need to change course from “business-as-usual” practices if they do not wish to be left behind.
“The global auto industry has been shaped by several inflection points over the past half-century, including the emergence of Japanese production techniques in the 1970s, then the rise of the Koreans, and the more recent disruption caused by Tesla,” Mark Wakefield, global co-leader of the automotive and industrial practice at AlixPartners, said of the analysis. “China is the industry’s new disruptor – capable of creating must-have vehicles that are faster to market, cheaper to buy, advanced on tech and design, and more efficient to build. For traditional [manufacturers], keeping pace with China’s strongest brands will require more than a course correction.” (RELATED: ‘Existential Problem’: US Auto Titans On Edge As Cheap Chinese Electric Vehicles Rev Up Competition)
Specific advantages for Chinese manufacturers include a 35% production cost advantage that allow flexibility to blunt the impacts of tariffs, a faster design cycle and a focus on providing drivers with advanced technology features that enhance the user experience, among others, according to AlixPartners’ report. These advantages cumulatively give Chinese automakers a leg up on American competitors in the evolving market.
BYD, China’s biggest auto manufacturer, already started examining options to penetrate the American market via Mexico, and critics of the Biden administration’s EV push have consistently expressed concern that the approach could end up backfiring by empowering Chinese production capable of undercutting the American industry’s biggest players. The administration is concerned about Chinese firms’ ability to do so, as well as unfair trade practices, leading the federal government to impose or strengthen tariffs against EVs, EV batteries and other related products in May.
The Biden administration has finalized a handful of stringent regulations for light-, medium- and heavy-duty vehicles in recent months, including a rule that will require manufacturers to ensure that EVs make up 56% of new sales by 2032, with an additional 13% of sales being plug-in hybrids by the same year. Additionally, the administration is spending billions of dollars to advance EV adoption, production and infrastructure, but major American firms are losing considerable sums of money on their electric product lines while consumer demand does not appear to be taking off at the rate proponents may have expected.
“Automakers expecting to continue operating under business-as-usual principles are in for more than just a rude awakening – they are headed for obsolescence,” Andrew Bergbaum, global co-leader of the automotive and industrial practice at AlixPartners, said. “The revolution taking place in the global auto industry is driven by the incredible and once unthinkable maturation of Chinese automakers that do a number of things differently.”
All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.
The Chinese are gaming government mandates.
And subsidizing full employment for firefighters.
“a rule that will require manufacturers to ensure that EVs make up 56% of new sales by 2032”
Can someone explain how this mandate would work?
If I’m determined to buy an ICE vehicle in 2032, and there are only EV’s left, I’m going to preorder a 2033, and wait, am I not?
In the UK for every excess ICE car the maker will be fined (some £8000 maybe), so you either pay the automaker the fine for early delivery or wait. In the meantime any company car owner is given an extra £4500 every year his company leases an EV car for him.
Sunak pushed back the ICE ban from 2030 to 2035 but kept the ICE sales limits the same, a smoke and mirrors announcement.
With Millivolt in charge the UK car market will be like Cuba’s with 2nd hand ICE’s commanding a premium and spares prices will rise as they are repaired.
So that’s the cost, and what’s the benefit?
Buy an ICE vehicle before 2030, just to be sure.
Get your new ICEV before MY 2026.
Did you mean 2036? Or is some other idiocy being inflicted by 2026?
No, manufacturers will limit production of normal cars to avoid the fines so you can’t wait to buy a new one. How they will cope with declining sales as nobody wants battery cars remains to be seen.
Biden most likely will be governing from the grave at this point, so I wouldn’t be too sure that his “rules” will still be in effect by then.
Good point.
Trump will do away with all of Biden’s mandates. Biden’s policy is in effect for about six more months.
There is no telling what Trump will do, he changes his mind daily.
He might just go back to being a Democrat if elected just to spite them.
He’s changed parties 6 times.
Biden shouldn’t run again either.
Still got that deep-seated TDS , I see. !
No known cure sadly!
Give it a rest and seek help for your delusions.
If that’s all that’s required, why aren’t we gaming theirs?
No point in blaming others for our incompetence. We have known this was coming for a decade or more and have done nothing but spunk cash on military intervention around the world instead of building up our industries.
It’s called ‘log rolling’ in US politics – mutual support among proponents of domestic and foreign intervention. IOW, socialism at home, empire abroad.
It isn’t the Government’s job to build up industries in a free-market society. It would be appropriate to not impose ill-conceived regulations that impede industry. Let’s hope that the fall of Chevron Deference will facilitate a rapid roll-back of administative over-reach, to include automotive mandates based on “facts” not in evidence.
I think there is a little bit of gray area here. For example, it is the Government’s job to protect the nation’s borders. In order to that, they heed to have certain home industries to support the construction of military equipment, which would include mining, smelting, refining, shipyards, and factories that can build that equipment. The US has done a very poor job of doing that, while building up those very industries in China.
Subsidizing EVs, windmills, and sunlight collectors is NOT a support to the military, and definitely not in support of US national interests.
It’s the governments job to maintain or create the opportunities for business, rather than stifling them.
The EPA is a shocking indictment of government overreach to crush business in America.
The US moved much of its industry to China to avoid pollution laws.
Yep.
Who created the pollution laws? China?
One of my first posts here was how western car makers get their second Detroit if they ignore EVs and how they need to innovate instead of pretending we never left the 60s and cry for government protection.
Slowly reality seeps in.
Maybe without them it will be easier to get public transport going.
“Maybe without them it will be easier to get public transport going.”
______________________________________________________
As I drive around town, I do an informal audit of the giant 50 passenger busses crawling around the city, and most of the time they are nearly empty.
Propaganda ads for public transportation show happy families and sunny skies riding the trolley cars the lefties usually favor. The reality is poor people with shopping bags waiting in the snow for a bus that’s late.
. . . and outside of densely built areas, “public” transportation is as scarce as functioning brain cells in >>>
My wife asked me to get her driving directions to visit someone.
Estimated time driving was about 25 minutes.
But noticed the estimated time by bus was 2 days and 17 hours. (I kid you not!)
I was the lone passenger on Denver RTD 63 seaters several times, especially during covid. Being one of only a few passengers during off-peak times is still pretty common.
Buses ought to have carriages.
Use a tractor unit with seating for, say, ten people during off peak times, then hitch up ‘carriages’ for peak times.
Or just buy small buses too. Instead of 100 big buses which wear out in 10 years, buy 100 big buses and 100 small buses which wear out in 20 years because they run half as often. The capital cost is less because small buses cost less, the driver cost is the same other than some minuscule additional training, the repair costs may increase from two sets of parts and some additional training, the fuel costs go down.
Why spend the money on engines left idle for half their lives?
There’s a mandate for communities to provide transportation for those who can’t drive a car. But giant busses trundling around town isn’t it.
If the dumbocrats have their way with policy it’ll be Rickshaws.
There is a reason why, once cars became available to the masses, surface public transport has always and everywhere had to be subsidised by taxpayers.
Railways were invented to move raw material and finished goods 24/24 and 7/7 so were profitable. Passenger rail was a happy accident but only profitable – icing on the cake – because freight covered the cost and gave handsome RoI.
Freight increasingly moved onto the roads in the 20th Century and absent freight no passenger railway can turn a profit.
Until about 1960.
Only due to subsidies.
Solar-powered buses, please!
Pedal powered. Make those passengers do some work!
Or if it’s electric, that won’t be showing up at all…
And getting mugged by gangs of thugs looking to steal their groceries… And handbags…And wallets…And Jewelry
“”Slowly reality seeps in.””
Yet I have not, to date, seen an iota of evidence backing this up where your posts are concerned. I would argue that if anything your modus operandi requires that you lob the odd incendiary – as any wind up merchant would.
Our coldest summer in over 25 years… bring on the fabled global warming.
Even the BBC has an article now on St Swithin’s day and the associated legend.
St Swithin’s Day: Will it rain for another 40 days? https://www.bbc.co.uk/weather/articles/cn4vrn7nml0o
Chinese carmakers are HEAVILY subsidized by the Chinese government. That’s why the US slapped onerous tariffs on their import.
When they can prove they can compete on a level playing field, legacy automakers need to be concerned.
So consumers should pay more for stuff – why? To keep people in jobs and increase shareholder dividends?
American consumers should buy American.
If they want to pay more for Chicom products, that’s their choice. They should know though that helping the Chicom economy by buying their products is detrimental to U.S. national security.
Except it is darn near impossible to buy American. Other than most perishables, almost every thing else is foreign made.
“ HEAVILY subsidized by the Chinese government”
Isn’t that how every business works by definition in the communist system? If gov owns everything then…
The Chinese “communist” system is actually fascist. Under communism, government owns all the means of production, ie, all business. Under fascism, businesses can own things but the government tells them what they have to do with them.
It is true. Crony capitalism is just another name for fascism. Once anyone lines up for government handouts, fascism is a done deal. “Strings” are always attached.
Democrats never say that fascism endangers our democracy. I wonder why?
Because Democrats are dishonest.
And a recent story reported that the PRC’s debt-to-GDP ratio was over 250 percent. The subsidies can’t go on forever – hence the need to invade western markets and get some foreign exchange.
“Slowly reality seeps in”
That reality being that consumers don’t want BEVs.
Adam Smith: Consumption is the sole end and purpose of all production; the interests of producers is to be considered as much as it serves the interests of consumers.
Too few in what passes for Government, in business and elsewhere understand that salient fact.
If you make stuff to please corporate mores, ideology and/or politics you go belly up.
All socialists believe economic laws, particularly Say’s Law, can be ignored with impunity.
-1 for saying “all” of -anyone- believes -anything-
Googling Say’s law amused. The tone of the top articles was predictable.
I understand your disagreement with the use of the word ‘all’, but perhaps you could provide an example of any form of socialism, whose adherents don’t believe they can ride roughshod over any of the basic tenets of economics.
John.
Eventually, unless you are “too big to fail”.
MetroRail in DC has shutdown stations and tracks for maintenance that will take months to accomplish.
This, obviously makes it easier to get public transport going.
Have you ever spent time in the US? I challenge you to provide a even a top-level plan for public transport, especially outside metropolitan areas. Let’s see a plan for public transport in the Great Plains.
Reality seeps in like a slow sewage leak. You still don’t understand free markets vs compulsion.
1) Americans want freedom to choose the best solution for them.
2) The premise is continued government mandates for EVs and Net Zero. Those are going on at least a 4 year hiatus starting in 2025. There’s going to be big row between the people and the bureaucratic state.
“Slowly reality seeps in.”
You mean the REALITY that most people do not want an EV !!
EVs are totally unsuitable for the way most people use a car.
But you, being locked in a basement, without even a licence, wouldn’t understand that fact.
Protect your EV industry by setting tariffs damages the cheap Green dream which we already knew was a lie. Tesla anyone?
________________________________________________________________
Does everyone understand the practicality of a plug-in hybrid? We have a hybrid, and it gets double the mileage of a comparable non-electric car. Were it a plug-in hybrid, depending on you’re average trip and keeping it plugged in at home, you’d rarely have to buy gas. Yes, you need a house with a garage or equivalent.
The pure EV folks love to point out how much more reliable electric motors are over internal combustion engines with their oil needs, waste heat removal, delicate fuel/air mix, etc.
Insurance companies are quick to total EVs after minor crashes because they’ve seen too many battery fires afterwards.
Apparently you are misinformed:
https://www.autobodynews.com/news/evs-totaled-at-lower-rate-than-ice-vehicles#:~:text=%E2%80%9CMany%20believe%20that%20auto%20insurers%20are%20writing%20EVs,%E2%80%9COur%20data%20simply%20does%20not%20support%20that%20conclusion.
In the UK some insurers are refusing cover on BEVs, others are increasing premiums by up to 70%.
Actuaries are seldom wrong.
JXB’s actuaries work in an area where AI is wanted to sidestep certain sensibilities and will have to be “corrected” so it doesn’t.
State Farm is refusing to write any new policies in CA and are seeking any excuse to drop existing coverage policies
For all practical purposes, waste heat removal for BEVs takes place at thermal power plants.
And transformers.
And if you’re unlucky, when the ev battery self ignites.
I’m totally fine with BEVs and hybrids so long as they aren’t subsidized or the people mandated to buy them. Let the market decide.
In that vein. markets can do a pretty go job of picking winners and losers without government putting its thumb on the scale. ICE vehicles beat out EVs a hundred years ago for many of the same reasons they are favored today.
Dozens of ICE companies were left at the side of the road because they couldn’t compete. That said, China cheats like leftists do.
If that system is inferior it will eventually collapse. ex USSR. Then who is “the next one”?
Subsidies and mandates appeared in a blink of an eye and can disappear just as fast.
Even WITH the subsidies and mandates, more than 90% choose ICE cars over EVs.
So we already know the answer, and the auto industry should be free to conduct its business accordingly.
45% of dwellings in the UK don’t have off street parking.
Europe is similar.
Stupid politicians running roughshod over 50% of householders who can’t economically support an EV, and most of the remaining population who have their own reasons for not wanting EV’s.
This isn’t democracy, this is tyranny.
Yet UK Govt has made subsidies available on electric chargers for people living apartments.
And how much do you have to pay per kWh for residential electricity to charge your hybrid?
Expect that price to double in the next three years.
Personally, I like the concept that EVs can be used at night to augment solar power, especially in northern winters with our long, cold nights.
Have you looked at the round trip efficiency of that (day grid AC –> rectifier –> battery DC –> inverter –> AC power (for home or back to grid)?
If you do, you’ll find that charging EV batteries during the day to provide electricity for grid or home use at night amounts to a tremendous WASTE of electricity . . . about 20%.
So … overnight the government taps into your EV’s battery for power. In the morning you can’t drive the EV to work because its battery is flat, so you leave the EV charging and cycle or bus or train or lift-cadge to work. The next night, the government taps into …….
I thought you left off the /sarc tag, but then I realized I fully agree with you! (As long as I am not the one who owns an EV!)
There is a word for this idea — theft.
And hauling that battery dead-weight around when burning gas or using battery juice does what to mileage?
Motor Trend found the Camry Hybrid to get 30 mpg in real world driving. Good, but no where near double.
As far as practicality, there’s nothing that makes a hybrid /more/ practical for most people. They’re just cars and you drive them.
Good, but no where near double.
My son’s hybrid Escape got maybe 4-5mpg more than our ICE one only one year apart in production.
My neighbor has a Toyota van, non-plug-in hybrid, new early this year or late last year. His daughter has the same model, a couple years older, pure ICE. In a recent conversation on the subject, he said that under plain freeway driving his gets about twice the mileage as his daughters’. He and his wife like to haul around a non aerodynamic trailer on their many pleasure excursion. He complains that his mileage really take a dive under that condition.
Just rented a Jeep Renegade hybrid for a week. I found nothing wrong with it, but nothing really positive comparing to an ICE car either. I drove mostly on freeways and have not tracked the mileage.
Wow. My 2021? VW Tiguan SUV gets some 30 mpg at around 70 mph, and 35 off the freeway on rural state highway with speed limits 30-55 mph. I’m not certain how it does so well.
In the early 70s when the gasoline crunch hit and mileage was widely reduced to 55, we had a Fiat 124 Sport Coupe. It was fun to drive under certain conditions but its 1.4L engine was underpowered and it had only a 4 speed gearbox, geared for Italian roads. Running at 55 mph had the engine turning so far below the torque peak that it did not improve mileage.
In the middle of that period we took a trip from the SF Bay Area, connecting to HW 5 north all the way into lower Canada, spending the time through Oregon and Washington on similar freeways (or also HW 5?).
We ran into little traffic control and were able to run at 80 mph most of the time, which is the Italian cruising speed for which the gearbox was designed. The mileage was the same as at 55 but the travel experience was definitely better.
Hybrids are a sound solution, smaller battery cuz you’ve got the ICE if the battery runs low, got the acceleration available from electric motor torque, and regenerative braking for traffic light driving….so you can use a smaller ICE for charging/hiway cruising if the battery is low, the stress of finding a charging station mid-route is gone, and the gasoline consumption is thus greatly reduced at the expense of your overnight electricity consumption.
Greenies don’t like them because they don’t entirely eliminate their hated oil companies….It would make a lot of sense if gov’t counted hybrids as EV’s for the purposes of their present (impractical)
ICE replacement programs.
“Hybrids are a sound solution,”
Hybrids are a solution to a non-problem.
We didn’t buy a hybrid to save the planet.
But that’s where they make the mistake. They should NOT use a smaller ICE in mild hybrids, because that just pushes car buyers back into trading performance for gas mileage, which can be done without the batteries and extra complexity (with less powerful ICEs).
They should add the hybrid systems with a correctly sized ICE that can move the car with authority ON ITS OWN, and then focus on getting gas mileage improvement while keeping the performance.
This was the Toyota Prius vs Honda Insight competition of 2000. The Insight used the engine to spin the wheels and the battery + motor/gen did acceleration (regen braking is a negative acceleration). 70+ mpg. The Prius ran on the motor/gen, and switched in the engine as the battery ran low. 50 ish mpg in the city, 30-40 ish on the road. But the Insight was light and tiny, the Prius could hold 6′ tall adults in the back seats.
Have a plain hybrid instead of a plug-in hybrid, and you don’t need the overnight electricity. So you get the benefits without any of the downsides. Just don’t tell the greenies it is 100% fossil-fuel-powered.
The battery powered ones are too. Even the ones “fueled” by PV or Wind get the devices that create that “green power” by burning fossil fuels every step of the way. But just try and tell the greenies that.
Many of our neighnors, with garages, choose to charge their EVs outdoors, using an extension cord.
I wouldn’t have one of those stupid things in my garage.
But then you won’t be able to charge it in bitter cold weather if you’re in a place that actually has *winter.*
My neighbors tell me they can’t do that where we live in the winter. It’s too cold in the winter, and the BEV won’t charge at night. Our neighbors use their garages as 400 sq ft storage sheds. I have an ICV 4WD pickup, and I still park it in my garage to protect it from the elements. Of course, some mornings I can’t get out of the garage because the snow is too high despite repeated ramming of the drift. That would probably stop a BEV pickup, too.
Plug-in hybrids is code for “underpowered piece of shit when the battery isn’t charged.”
And when kept “plugged in” that makes all the time it spends in your garage prime time for it to light itself on fire.
No thanks!
I don’t think that EVs are the future. Hybrids maybe, but I’m not even sure about that. Depends on what the life of the hybrid is compared to ICE.
Old news====>
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/chinese-ev-makers-planning-factories-120000495.html
I don’t intend to buy a Chinese car of any sort, certainly not while their economy is crashing.
From https://www.binghamtonreview.com/2024/03/a-peek-into-modern-day-china/ :
China is also suffering in the electric vehicles (EVs) market. Ever since their introduction, EVs have been looked upon more favorably than gas powered cars for their greater fuel efficiency; one battery charge could be equivalent to one half or even one quarter of a full gas tank. The problem, however, is that they are made with the same principle as the aforementioned Tofu Buildings. China is currently experiencing one of its coldest winters in recent memory, and many of its car batteries don’t last as long due to lack of insulation and being made with suboptimal material. Those who purchase a car will be promised an extensive range in kilometers on their battery. Yet in reality, it would take them maybe one half or even one quarter of the way; that doesn’t include heat or air-conditioning.. If those are turned on, the car’s driving range will drop dramatically. On Feb 3, for instance, thousands of vehicles were stranded on a highway, and because people have EVs, the heat can only stay on for so long. They were eventually forced to resort to burning tree branches on the side of the road to stay warm.
See also https://contrarianunicus.substack.com/p/chinas-tofu-dreg . The last YouTube is also worthwhile – it’s by “SerpentZA,”a South African who lived in China doing medical device instruction – I came across him early in Covid-19 and quickly found him to be the best source of info on the “Wuhan flu” and the CCP’s control of the story. His wife is a doctor from Wuhan, and now live in California.
I’ve followed that guy as far back as when he and another expat were vlogging China riding around on scrambler motorbikes. Good source of information. His story of getting out of China is pretty wild.
EV’s make sense for reducing local pollution in many Chinese cities. On my travels there, I experienced bad air in several parking garages, which don’t appear to have any forced ventilation.
Used to say that about Hyundai, then Kia. Times change.
My previous car was a Hyundai. In the mid 1980s the small PC printer company I worked for got involved with a South Korean company about a joint project. When we referenced some Japanese competitors, it was instantly clear these folks, born after WWII, still maintained the national grudge against the Japanese and were out to best them in any arena.
Around 2017 I figured Korea might have mostly caught up to Japanese car quality and bought a Hyundai Elantra after running my Saturn SL2 into the ground (315k miles). Worked out well.
Then why “I don’t intend to buy a Chinese car of any sort”. Original tresponse was all anti-ev, which goes with the main article. New response implies that if you believed they made a “good one” then you’d go for it.
Ric doesn’t say, but consider:
A Chinese car is produced for the benefit of the CCP and it’s favored cronies. It will be just barely good enough for the job, be built with slave/forced/serf labor, by using materials extorted from Third World countries, and will be a rip-off of other’s intellectual property.
Or you can buy a car from a company that has to compete for your business by offering a car you want at a price you’ll pay without using the levers of government to steal and extort. I vote for avoiding Chinese goods as much as practical. Doing so will certainly be the better choice morally, and is likely to get you a better and more reliable product:
I-95 in Virginia closed 26 hours due to a snow storm. Thousands stranded.
I shudder to think the magnitude of the casualty list had all those been EVs.
Maybe they should have just drawn straws and lit the loser’s ev on fire – would have kept them warm a lot longer and more effectively.
The Chinese threaten every industry that produces products by virtue of their lower labor costs. In services, India threatens China because their service labor costs are even lower.
Whether Chinese automakers eat the lunch of American car makers, it seems unlikely. American automakers have repeatedly reinvented themselves to deal with foreign competitive threats going back the last 40 some years. That is no guarantee that that will continue, but given history, take these predictions with lots of grains of salt.
US used to want to “bring back manufacturing jobs for the working class” because human workers built stuff. New spin is “bring back manufacturing jobs for the middle class” because too many people know that robots are cheaper than humans long term. Most of the cost is the programmer, but that one guy can replace many.
My wonders are:
A few articles on EV interest.
J.D. Power:
“A new report from automotive research firm J.D. Power noted fading EV interest from American consumers.
For the first time since J.D. Power began its Electric Vehicle Consideration Study in 2021, EV buying sentiment has dropped.
The latest edition of the study revealed that 24% of respondents say they are “very likely” to consider purchasing an EV, down from 26% a year ago.
In addition, the percentage of shoppers who say they are “overall likely” to consider purchasing an EV decreased to 58% from 61% last year.”
Barron’s:
“In an online survey, 3,724 Wall Street Journal readers shared their current vehicle ownership and future lease and/or purchase plans. Of those surveyed, 12% said they were considering purchasing an EV, a drop of 10 percentage points from a year ago.”
AAA:
“Over the last six years of conducting our survey, appetite for EVs has remained basically stagnant – hovering around 20% with interest hitting its highest point – 25% in 2022 and in 2023 it was 23%, but not a statistically significant change from previous years.”
It hardly looks like a market ready to be swept by cheaply-built, tiny vehicles.
Munition companies should be concerned about competition from Chinese EV makers.
Don’t make the mistake of believing ‘cheaply-built’ means badly built. The Japanese made cheaply-built cars in the 60’s & 70’s and they set standards in quality the US and Europe struggled to rival.
Nor are the Chinese cars small, at least by European standards, with 5 seat sedans and SUV’s, some of which are jaw dropping in appearance.
These guys are serious and it’s not their fault they are penetrating markets. It’s our fault for being complacent once again when the far east signals it’s intention. Instead of competing we are left with few options, the favourite being tariffs, and they do nobody any good.
Your inferences assume a lot. Comparing japanese cars w chinese is a tricky one. Japan entered the market w a cheaper and more reliable product. Could you say the same about chinese EVs these days? And Japan opened production factories with services around the world. China? Track record? Zilch..
“entered the market w a cheaper and more reliable product” needs a reference. “ cheaper and more reliable” than what? If the reference is Dodge Darts then …
If it was awesome ICE cars they were building, there might be cause for concern. EVs are a niche product with a market too small to enable economies of scale once the subsidies get curtailed.
“Don’t make the mistake of believing ‘cheaply-built’ means badly built.”
“American automakers will need to make major changes …”
Un-said: American governments will need to make major changes …
“We need bigger subsidies, stronger mandates and giant honking tariffs.”
“…But just imagine how much more in
kickbackspolitical donations you’ll get from us for all that!”“”American automakers will need to make major changes to their businesses if they want to remain competitive with Chinese electric vehicles””
They could do worse than follow Ferrari’s lead….
The Italian supercar maker is planning to develop new combustion-powered cars into the 2030s, a sharp juxtaposition to the majority of carmakers, which plan to go all-electric by the end of the decade.
https://www.roadandtrack.com/news/a44473626/ferrari-boss-says-no-to-ev-only/
A maverick???
“”Vauxhall-owner may halt UK production over EV plans””
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cn44v3e7nggo
It’s very simple. A percentage of cars sold MUST be EVs. If you can’t sell them you get fined for the shortfall.
So, obviously production of ICE cars is reduced massively to make the percentages add up. Or those costs are passed on to the customers.
New-new Labour redundancies and lay-offs all round – oh and trebles, too….
From the above article:
“The auto market is evolving to favor EVs thanks in part to the policy choices of the Biden administration and other Western governments, and the consultancy concludes that American firms need to change course from “business-as-usual” practices if they do not wish to be left behind.”
Huh? Say what???
Numerous, recent articles have described how the US market for plug-in EV’s (excluding hybrids) has drastically flattened in the last year, as well as how almost all major car manufacturers have “walked back” their previously-announced plans to abandon ICE-powered cars in favor of EVs. The simple fact is that EVs just aren’t selling as was optimistically forecast five or so years ago, despite the continuation of government purchase incentives.
In 2023, sales of EVs comprised just under 8% of the total US car and light duty truck vehicle market.
Since Tesla launched its Model S mass production in 2012 (that’s 12 years ago!) the EV market in the US—with the most wealthy pool of potential EV buyers in the world—has “evolved” to less than 8% of annual vehicle sales . . . even with Bidenomics in play!
Glad you noticed that, I read through all these comments wondering why no one else was picking up on that.
The article essentially contradicts itself. Its says first that Chinese EV manufacturers are going to destroy American manufacturers, while stating that despite subsisidies and mandates, buyers still prefer ICE by almost 10:1. How do you destroy a competitor by competing with less than 10% of their market?
Don’t worry about those targets of xx% by year 20XX either. That can will just get kicked down the road over and over again even by loonie leftie greenie governments as market realities keep slapping them in the face.
Those Chinese cars are cheap because they are built with stolen IP, control over the battery supply chain, and government subsidies. All fixable with trade agreements negotiated properly.
No, they’re not headed for obsolescence they will eventually be under government ownership in one form or another. Neither Ford nor GM have been able to turn a profit on BEV’s and it’s unlikely they ever will. The sale of lucrative light duty trucks and SUV’s is what continues to prop them up financially. If the government’s rules requiring most cars and light duty vehicles be EV’s by 2035 then I don’t see how the Big 3 survive. That means all of those UAW jobs, jobs in the related supply chain and attending campaign contributions will disappear. There’s no way this will be allowed to happen. As proof I would point to the industry bailouts after the 2008 financial crisis. The precedent has been set.
If it’s under a Democrat administration the big 3 will be combined into one organization and it will be out and out government owned, the U.S. version of the Volga in the Communist USSR if you will. If under a more conservative administration the companies will retain a facade of private ownership but will be heavily subsidized. That would make them privately owned but essentially under government dictate. Which by the way, is one of the main tenants of fascism. In any event I suspect this has been the plan all along.
Most likely scenario: Next year the Trump Administration rescinds the mandate.
Even Democrat governments would quietly kick that can down the road. Its what happens when idealism crashed into reality.
IF he’s elected. Even odds right now.
This whiplashing from mandated EVs back to ICVs is still very rough on car makers. They’ve invested billions of dollars in EV development just to learn it’s a losing proposition. Five years from now there could be alarmist in office. That administration will really punish those carmakers who didn’t keep the faith.
It’s ugly. I wouldn’t invest in any AMerican carmaker for the next few years unless Congress steps in to protect them from future Executive Orders and EPA mandates.
Battery powered cars are a niche market. Suitable for most people’s short runs to the grocery store. Not good for the family trip to Yellowstone. Therefore partial replacement ICE powered vehicles is the best they can achieve with present battery tech. Gov’t efforts to go 100% EV are doomed to failure.
[ QUOTE FROM ARTICLE]“Automakers expecting to continue operating under business-as-usual principles are in for more than just a rude awakening – they are headed for obsolescence,” Andrew Bergbaum,[END QUOTE]
If all these regulations were put in place by executive order by President Biden, who is heading for obsolescence himself, they could be repealed by executive order by the once-and-future President Trump on January 20, 2025. Then let the market drive the auto industry’s selection of either electric or ICE-powered cars.
There is no free market when a competitor has an unfair advantage which in this case is labor.You don’t need to be a conspiracy theorist to see how AGW was planned to take down Capitalism. Destroy one of the major drivers of the industrial revolution and you have a foothold to destroy it. The only recourse for protecting your industrial base in this scenario is massive tariffs. Go Trump.
Competitive? Competing to see who can go bankrupt quickest? Why would any sane business want to compete in a failing market?
Speaking of BYD – here in Blighty their radio ad boasts, among other things, their car comes with Vegan sports seats. At last a use has been found for Vegans.
EVs are part of the story, but Chinese companies also sell diesel and gas trucks and SUVs around the world. Great Wall Motors trucks are pretty common in Australia and Mexico.
They’re mostly mid-size and smaller trucks. They would have to design full size trucks specifically for the US and Canada, as no other market buys these vehicles.
Nissan’s track record with the Titan shows how hard it is to break into this segment in the US. Doing it with an EV might be even harder.
Doing it “with an EV” will be impossible. Nobody wants EVs save the deluded virtue signalers who already bought one.
Some would say the Chinese are welcome to dominate a market that isn’t going to expand very much. WUWT itself has today the previous article being about insufficient charging infrastructure for EVs.
Western politicians and Eastern EV manufacturers are alike in thinking they know the future of personal transportation lies in EV car manufacture. That which can’t happen won’t happen.
Biden’s policies are designed to bankrupt the American automotive industry. They are designed to bankrupt the industries. Biden is actively trying to take away American union jobs. Yet the unions still vote for him. Why? Why would any voter in Michigan who cares about the economic wellbeing of their state ever consider voting for Biden. Yet millions will. Why?
The Biden Administration has taken many decisions which are so perverse and inimical to the interests of the US I can only conclude that they are motivated by actual malice.
hate oil companies, hate Republicans, hate individuals becoming wealthy, at least if they aren’t socialists, HATE is a large part of the reason, propaganda, frequently based on hate, is another major part of the reason. Fear based on propaganda is the largest remaining part of the reason.
but according to reports here the EV is a dying breed!!
Well not if Gummint mandates them and Commies engage in dumping. What’s the idea of dumping? You’re basically selling at or below cost taking a hit in the short run to bankrupt your competitors for long term returns. ie now you only have a choice of lots of Commie brands and models but the price has gone back up. It only works with products like cars whereby there’s big investment to get back into the market again when profitability returns.
PS: Don’t forget the commies are rolling cheap with 54% of the world’s coal while your carmakers are bumping along with the solar panels windmills and batteries they’ve already cornered the market with cheap power and dumping to really stick the boots in.
It is. So they threaten to ” dominate” a market for a product nobody wants.
“the EV is a dying breed”
yep, after 5-6 years…. then to the scrap-heap. !
Nobody with more than a single brain cell is going to buy a 5-6 year old EV. !
China 202x reads a lot like Japan 198x.
I read “Chinese Automakers Could Be Poised to Wipe Out American Car Titans” and thought: “you mean like Honda and Toyota and Subaru?”
Traditional auto manufacturer nameplates from the US like Ford and Chevy only exist as pickup trucks and race cars. They gave up on anything I could drive to work decades ago.
It looks like the PRC is in a race with itself to flood the rest-of-the-world market with its Eva and batteries before it’s economy falls into a serious recession, led by its incredible debt-to-GDP ratio and falling real estate market.
As to all of us running out to buy cheap BYDs, have any typical American drivers actually driven one? Do they provide the “driver experience” desired, or the performance needed?
It looks that way, but why?
China does not have a mandatory $20 per hour minimum wage.
Do you think that might have some small effect?
I’ve often heard it said, if the West wants to compete with China the first thing they should start exporting is unions.
“with advanced technology features that enhance the user experience…”
like taking control of the vehicle and crashing them ???
Online banking
Online stock market
Online tax prep
Online dating
Smart meters
Horse has left the barn