Financial Folks - WHat's it Mean

[WayOutWest]

The US would not be hypocritical in demanding the dismissal of an auto exec. who decided to not introduce a technology they spent money on to develop that would make diesel cars more fuel efficent, and less pollutin

have you seen who killed the electric car rick?  Or are you just pretty naive about how government and big business work?

IMO the auto makers killed the electric car.  It's pretty obvious they had the most to lose if the electric car became successfull.  The market for consumable car parts would be detroyed and cost the auto industry billions.

[jemagee]

Yes - the auto makers did kill the electric car - but the government let them kill the technology they spent money to develop that would reduce foreign dpendence on oil - and demanded no dimissals of auto execs and in fact helped them kill the electric car.

The documentary is online for free at google - i watched it for a photoshop class cause the other two options were michael moore films and i couldn't do that to myself.

So as far as ports go - LA is the biggest but not necessarily the busiest - got it.

All I know is it takes too long for my carob (locust bean cause it confuses them when i tell them it's the same damn thing) granules to clear.

[WayOutWest]

So as far as ports go - LA is the biggest but not necessarily the busiest - got it.

No. 

Size wise there are bigger ports in the US, port of LA is the busiest.

[ziggy]

The US would not be hypocritical in demanding the dismissal of an auto exec. who decided to not introduce a technology they spent money on to develop that would make diesel cars more fuel efficent, and less pollutin

have you seen who killed the electric car rick?  Or are you just pretty naive about how government and big business work?

IMO the auto makers killed the electric car.  It's pretty obvious they had the most to lose if the electric car became successfull.  The market for consumable car parts would be detroyed and cost the auto industry billions.

The American consumer killed the electric car, because only 627 people wanted to buy them.

[jemagee]

The American consumer killed the electric car, because only 627 people wanted to buy them.

No one was allowed to buy them, or keep them.

[westkoast]

The American consumer killed the electric car, because only 627 people wanted to buy them.

No one was allowed to buy them, or keep them.

It was a little bit more then that.

People forget that some areas wouldn't be able to handle 10s of thousands of electric cars plugging into their grid.  Not to mention there was a distance issue for that car for a real long time.  Just because you can plug them into the wall doesn't mean it makes sense if you wanted to drive over 100 miles.  Filling up on gas was still the cheapest and EASIEST (we are talking about the American consumer here right?) route to go. 

[jemagee]

I understand that - but i found it fascinating that no one was allowed to purchase (only lease) and even those who wanted to keep their cars and deal with the limitations inherent in the car were basically told to F' off.

I don't drive much - i go through a tank of gas in maybe a week and a half...something like that would have been perfect for me.

[ziggy]

I understand that - but i found it fascinating that no one was allowed to purchase (only lease) and even those who wanted to keep their cars and deal with the limitations inherent in the car were basically told to F' off.

I don't drive much - i go through a tank of gas in maybe a week and a half...something like that would have been perfect for me.

In my econ class for my final I did a report on GM.  I looked at their financial results related to a number of different variables.  One was the price of oil.  The relationship between oil and profit was negative 75%.  In other words as the price of oil goes up, GM profits crash.  This one variable explained 75% of the variability of their margins.  So why would GM keep people from buying a car which will take away the single biggest cause in their profit variability?  It is completely illogical.

BTW do you own a Prius?  A Mini-Cooper?  If not, then even though you say it would be perfect for you that is not the way you actually act.

[rickortreat]

I have no idea who "killed" the electric car.  Is it possible that the technology just couldn't deliver? Or, are you convinced that it was a sinister plot?  Considering GM could go under, do you really want to save an evil co-conspirator in the effort to keep the American consumer from affordable, personal transportation?

Electricity makes sense as the largest energy distribution network, next to the oil complex.  But there's more than one way to store energy than batteries:  http://tinyurl.com/2qylmv

[WayOutWest]

I understand that - but i found it fascinating that no one was allowed to purchase (only lease) and even those who wanted to keep their cars and deal with the limitations inherent in the car were basically told to F' off.

I don't drive much - i go through a tank of gas in maybe a week and a half...something like that would have been perfect for me.

In my econ class for my final I did a report on GM.  I looked at their financial results related to a number of different variables.  One was the price of oil.  The relationship between oil and profit was negative 75%.  In other words as the price of oil goes up, GM profits crash.  This one variable explained 75% of the variability of their margins.  So why would GM keep people from buying a car which will take away the single biggest cause in their profit variability?  It is completely illogical.

BTW do you own a Prius?  A Mini-Cooper?  If not, then even though you say it would be perfect for you that is not the way you actually act.

ziggy,

I'd be interested to know how much consumable parts contributes to GM's profits.  IMO the fact that you would not need things like air filters, oil filters, etc... would make it difficult to keep a revenue stream comming in if you can't make anything after the initial sale.

[ziggy]

ziggy,

I'd be interested to know how much consumable parts contributes to GM's profits.  IMO the fact that you would not need things like air filters, oil filters, etc... would make it difficult to keep a revenue stream comming in if you can't make anything after the initial sale.

I don't know how much consumables add to GM's bottom line, but I am sure it is not a trivial amount.  I believe that for dealers it is a much bigger % than for a manufacturer.  I understand your point though, and it is valid.  It is also important to remember that if GM did produce an electric car and the margins associated with parts were minimized, then they would have to aggressively change their business plan, and price the vehicle relative to the value it offered.  In other words GM would have to price the vehicle accordingly, and perhaps that would 20% to 40% higher than an internal combustion engine vehicle.  That is what Toyota has done with the Prius, and sales are not nearly as high as a result.  Hence why I believe the US consumer killed the electric car.

[westkoast]

ziggy,

I'd be interested to know how much consumable parts contributes to GM's profits.  IMO the fact that you would not need things like air filters, oil filters, etc... would make it difficult to keep a revenue stream comming in if you can't make anything after the initial sale.

I don't know how much consumables add to GM's bottom line, but I am sure it is not a trivial amount.  I believe that for dealers it is a much bigger % than for a manufacturer.  I understand your point though, and it is valid.  It is also important to remember that if GM did produce an electric car and the margins associated with parts were minimized, then they would have to aggressively change their business plan, and price the vehicle relative to the value it offered.  In other words GM would have to price the vehicle accordingly, and perhaps that would 20% to 40% higher than an internal combustion engine vehicle.  That is what Toyota has done with the Prius, and sales are not nearly as high as a result.  Hence why I believe the US consumer killed the electric car.

Pretty tough for them to price an electric car at a level people would buy it when they are paying over 70 bucks an hour per employee (including benefits,insurance).  GM really can't make a smaller, cheaper car.  They need to make trucks and SUVs to really make solid profits.

[jemagee]

70 bucks an hour per employee (including benefits,insurance)

That might be a problem...

[Reality]

I have no idea who "killed" the electric car.  Is it possible that the technology just couldn't deliver? Or, are you convinced that it was a sinister plot?  Considering GM could go under, do you really want to save an evil co-conspirator in the effort to keep the American consumer from affordable, personal transportation?

Electricity makes sense as the largest energy distribution network, next to the oil complex.  But there's more than one way to store energy than batteries:  http://tinyurl.com/2qylmv

The show had an older couple, both having PHDs or similiar who made a battery that delivered much more miles per recharge.  They sold the patent rights to GM with the understanding that their battery would be used. 

GM sold it to Texaco or one of the oil bois (help me out here "Who Killed.." watchers.

[Skandery]

I think WayOutWest makes a fantastic point about consumables.  GM was a factor in the failure of their own product because they realized they would have to drastically change their business model if the Electric Car was aggressively marketed and proved successful.  A former top-level marketer for GM so much as point-blank said there came a time when he was persuaded not to push the product anymore.  Why?  Four words.  California Air Resources Board.  GM begrudgingly took on the projects of the EV-1 because it all of a sudden became THE LAW in California.  As soon as the multitude of special interests (automobile industry included!) lobbied the CARB enough for them to overturn the Minimum Percent Vehicles w/ Zero Emission Law, the EV-1 disappeared. 

The Electric Car was something the US Consumer didn't understand, and to this day don't, as evidenced by:

Is it possible that the technology just couldn't deliver?

People forget that some areas wouldn't be able to handle 10s of thousands of electric cars plugging into their grid.

 

Most times that is what marketing does, make people comfortable, make people understand the benefit.  It would be interesting to delve into GM financial archives and compare what their initial marketing budget and actual expenditure was for the EV-1 and what it was for oh, say the GMC Yukon/Denali.