GM Volt Forum banner

1 - 20 of 22 Posts

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
6,278 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Doesn't this seem odd. Why wouldn't they want to sell them? Build them and sell them!

https://electrek.co/2017/10/20/chevy-bolt-ev-opel-norwegian-dealers-stop-taking-orders/

In the US, GM has delivered just under 15,000 Bolt EVs since the launch last year and while deliveries have increased in recent months, Bolt EV inventories increased to several thousand units during the summer. Most of the inventory was in California while other states were starved of the all-electric vehicle, like some European markets.

It’s not clear what is stopping them from producing/delivering more cars. In Europe, the PSA deal might be at play, but they were also reports that GM is losing money on the vehicle without ZEV credits.
https://insideevs.com/opel-tells-norwegian-dealers-cease-orders-ampera-e-demand-far-exceeds-supply/
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,416 Posts
Doesn't this seem odd. Why wouldn't they want to sell them? Build them and sell them!
Very odd. Is it to spite PSA? Is it because they take a loss on each one without the (ZEV) cap and trade offset? Are they afraid to price them at a profit, and have everyone find out what they really cost to make?

This makes the 20 new EVs by 2023 claim seem even more dubious.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,634 Posts
Or maybe a simpler explanation is they dont have the batteries to sell that many and they dont want customers waiting that long. Pretend they have to ask 2 years in advance for how many batteries they want, and lets guess they ask for 30k a year for the Bolt EV. If they have delivered 15k in US with 3 months left, I estimate they sell another 10k in the US by then (they have 4700 ready to sell), that is 25k cars. That leaves only 5k for overseas. They dont want to over sell cars they dont have.

My guess is the new BEV CUV gets additional batteries so they still probably won't have any extra capacity until 2019. My guess is we see many new battery factories announced next year. Even if my guesstimates are wrong, I think the point stands.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,410 Posts

Opel is probably is NOW paying the real full price for those Bolts since Opel is now part of Groupe PSA rather than being part of GM...they probably want them to push their family of vehicles...Peugeot, Citroen, DS, Opel, and Vauxhall

Wouldn't this be similar to GM selling Teslas?...:)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,193 Posts
Or maybe a simpler explanation is they dont have the batteries to sell that many and they dont want customers waiting that long.
^^^ This.

While I certainly believe that GM is working hard with LG Chem to ramp up battery production this is a process that takes time (several months). GM is just now starting to get a decent idea what the demand is for a car like the Bolt EV / Ampera-e. And with this car being built in North America and shipped to Europe the logistics are not very easy either.

When GM sold Opel to PSA part of the agreement was that GM would also help jointly develop and sell EV's with PSA. So I don't think Opel being sold to PSA is the motivator behind this.

In fact my guess is that Opel underestimated demand for the Ampera-e. When GM was developing the Bolt EV and Ampera-e they would have gone to various regions and asked for anticipated demand from various marketing departments. Now with Opel asking for more cars GM is likely saying well you said you were only going to sell X so your only going to get X.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
6,278 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
While I certainly believe that GM is working hard with LG Chem to ramp up battery production this is a process that takes time (several months). GM is just now starting to get a decent idea what the demand is for a car like the Bolt EV / Ampera-e. And with this car being built in North America and shipped to Europe the logistics are not very easy either.
Poor planning for the international stage? This vehicle fits more in non-USA environments in the looks/size/etc department and thus would sell 'there' presumably. Nissan, Renault, Mitsubishi, Tesla, Hyundai, BMW, BYU going to do much better just because of planning and follow through?

I thought in 2010/11 when I ordered/bought my Volt that GM was serious. We are 7 years later and they've done a pretty modest effort by comparison to what they could have (e.g. ELR). A real disappointment to many.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,416 Posts
I read a few articles on battery production being ramped up - in China. That's said to be a hedge against falling out of favor with the Chinese communists. I don't read anything about a lack of batteries for North America or Europe though there has been news about an LG battery factory in Poland.

What I have read is that the Bolt is sold at a loss, and perhaps it only makes profit as a compliance car. GM might sell a certain number at a loss to get some market penetration, but I'm sure that has a limit.

Electrek articles may not be popular, and this isn't new news, but: https://electrek.co/2017/05/03/gm-electric-vehicle-profit-bolt-ev/
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,634 Posts
The UBC study shows that the Bolt EV likely has a positive gross margin, meaning they aren't losing money on its production. They appear to only be losing money when looking at net margin. Pretend the Bolt EV cost $750M to design (given new platform this is a reasonable assumption), and they only sell 100k of them for this generation. That amounts to an R&D cost of $7,500 per car. If they could sell 200k that would only be $3750 per car. So, like Tesla, I like to think of it as: They lose money for every unsold Bolt EV.

I imagine they will ramp up production of Bolt EV as necessary, or not and just plan on the future EVs replacing its demand (like the Buick BEV CUV coming up shortly). These future EVs will likely be larger volume vehicles so more can be spent on R&D without losing money, or they will leverage the Bolt EV platform, so the R&D will be much less. Only updated bodies, interiors, etc.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,416 Posts
The UBC study shows that the Bolt EV likely has a positive gross margin, meaning they aren't losing money on its production.
Mark Ruess said:
“We know the customers would like to drive electric cars but are unwilling to pay any more for them. That’s why we’re going to be the first company to sell electric vehicles that people can afford at a profit.”
Why would he say that?

I wouldn't ask him "Why aren't you making more cars that you're not making a profit on?".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,684 Posts
If the Bolt is sold at a loss, then how can Tesla sell the Model 3 at a profit? They cannot. Perhaps that explains the slow production ramp up for it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,011 Posts
Gah. If a thing is losing money due to characteristics of a particular market, then raise the price in that market.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
260 Posts
If the Bolt is sold at a loss, then how can Tesla sell the Model 3 at a profit? They cannot. Perhaps that explains the slow production ramp up for it.
Tesla can make a profit on the 3 a lot easier than GM can.

First you start by having your own battery factory that is the largest battery factory in the world and in the top 5 largest factories in the world. This will save you a lot on batteries which happen to be the largest single cost in any electric car.

Second you produce them with advanced automation which cuts down on costs, allows for longer run times and repeatability. Then you do this in one of the 10 largest factories in the world.

Third you produce hundreds of thousand of them a year which as anyone knows that economy of scale typically reduces the cost.

Those reasons above alone will allow the base model to have a profit built in.

Fourth you allow options: all wheel drive, larger batteries, autopilot, panoramic roof. This is where the 20%+ profit will come in.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,405 Posts
Tesla can make a profit on the 3 a lot easier than GM can.

First you start by having your own battery factory that is the largest battery factory in the world and in the top 5 largest factories in the world. This will save you a lot on batteries which happen to be the largest single cost in any electric car.

Second you produce them with advanced automation which cuts down on costs, allows for longer run times and repeatability. Then you do this in one of the 10 largest factories in the world.

Third you produce hundreds of thousand of them a year which as anyone knows that economy of scale typically reduces the cost.

Those reasons above alone will allow the base model to have a profit built in.

Fourth you allow options: all wheel drive, larger batteries, autopilot, panoramic roof. This is where the 20%+ profit will come in.
We will see.
  • IIRC, the Gigafactory is 20% complete. Panasonic and Samsung are producing nearly all Tesla cells.
  • All automakers are heavily automated, and have been since way before Tesla built it's first Lotus conversion.
  • Economy of scale is extremely non-linear. Where is the tipping point? It's a lot lower than 100k units a year.
  • But when it comes to buying power, GM wins. They have a larger and more robust supply chain. GM can get better raw materials at the same price, or the same raw materials at a lower price. They have redundancy in the chain. "OH!! We are late again because our suppliers still suck donkey balls" is not on General Motor's Mission Statement.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
7,289 Posts
Could be as simple as GM going to PSA "OK, we'll make X Bolts/Ampera-e's to ship to Europe for the next Y years" when they were negotiating the sale of Opel. The agreed to "X" figure is likely woefully less than what the demand is across the pond. Since GM has no financial interests in Europe anymore, what incentive do they have to make MORE Bolts for PSA? Tough nuggets Europe. Wait for the Model 3 I guess.

And wait...and wait...and wait.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,416 Posts
IIRC, the Gigafactory is 20% complete. Panasonic and Samsung are producing nearly all Tesla cells.
Nearly? Who do they get cells from other than those two?

All automakers are heavily automated, and have been since way before Tesla built it's first Lotus conversion.
And they're better at getting the lines working on a reasonable schedule. They have the experience and the manpower. What Tesla is attempting smacks of ignorance of the basics. You can't just have techs pop out of the ground to set up your line for you on the scale and time frame they want.

It's going to be a lot like the housing bubble. A lot of folks didn't get the A team, or the B team. There were so many inexperienced people working on building homes that there was an F team and maybe worse. We built ours in 2007 and I wouldn't have time to list all the things that had to be fixed after closing. It took the builder a full year to fix all of the warranty work.

Factually the Roadster wasn't a Lotus conversion, though Lotus definitely helped with it quite a bit.

But when it comes to buying power, GM wins. They have a larger and more robust supply chain.
They have much more to offer a supplier in terms of volume of business. I think this is why Musk talks about wanting to do everything in-house. Gotta read between the lines on that one.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,410 Posts
We will see.
  • IIRC, the Gigafactory is 20% complete. Panasonic and Samsung are producing nearly all Tesla cells.
  • All automakers are heavily automated, and have been since way before Tesla built it's first Lotus conversion.
  • Economy of scale is extremely non-linear. Where is the tipping point? It's a lot lower than 100k units a year.
  • But when it comes to buying power, GM wins. They have a larger and more robust supply chain. GM can get better raw materials at the same price, or the same raw materials at a lower price. They have redundancy in the chain. "OH!! We are late again because our suppliers still suck donkey balls" is not on General Motor's Mission Statement.
Nearly? Who do they get cells from other than those two?



And they're better at getting the lines working on a reasonable schedule. They have the experience and the manpower. What Tesla is attempting smacks of ignorance of the basics. You can't just have techs pop out of the ground to set up your line for you on the scale and time frame they want.

It's going to be a lot like the housing bubble. A lot of folks didn't get the A team, or the B team. There were so many inexperienced people working on building homes that there was an F team and maybe worse. We built ours in 2007 and I wouldn't have time to list all the things that had to be fixed after closing. It took the builder a full year to fix all of the warranty work.

Factually the Roadster wasn't a Lotus conversion, though Lotus definitely helped with it quite a bit.



They have much more to offer a supplier in terms of volume of business. I think this is why Musk talks about wanting to do everything in-house. Gotta read between the lines on that one.
rumors have been swirling about negotiations with other suppliers like LG and SK Innovation.

Samsung appers to be relegated to Powerwall project in Australia for the moment

Panansonic is now the exclusive battery supplier for vehicle as of NOW...But as of last year, Tesla took delivery of enough Samsung cells to make 200 battery packs and for a month now rumors have been swirling about negotiations with other suppliers like LG and SK Innovation. Just yesterday saw a report that Samsung SDI was making progress in talks with Tesla on supplying batteries. And Tesla has worked with other suppliers in the past — the battery pack in the upgraded Tesla Roadster 2.5, for example, featured cells sourced from LG.

https://www.teslacentral.com/panasonic-exclusive-battery-supplier-tesla-model-s-x-and-3

the total number of duplicate parts was under 7% by parts count.

https://www.tesla.com/blog/mythbusters-part-2-tesla-roadster-not-converted-lotus-elise
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,416 Posts
Man, Tsuga-San is going to be pissed. Panasonic has been cleaning up after Solar City, has its processes installed in the Gigafactory, and Musk goes philandering with that hot LG chick who lives down the street?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,405 Posts
Nearly? Who do they get cells from other than those two?



And they're better at getting the lines working on a reasonable schedule. They have the experience and the manpower. What Tesla is attempting smacks of ignorance of the basics. You can't just have techs pop out of the ground to set up your line for you on the scale and time frame they want.

It's going to be a lot like the housing bubble. A lot of folks didn't get the A team, or the B team. There were so many inexperienced people working on building homes that there was an F team and maybe worse. We built ours in 2007 and I wouldn't have time to list all the things that had to be fixed after closing. It took the builder a full year to fix all of the warranty work.

Factually the Roadster wasn't a Lotus conversion, though Lotus definitely helped with it quite a bit.



They have much more to offer a supplier in terms of volume of business. I think this is why Musk talks about wanting to do everything in-house. Gotta read between the lines on that one.
Just because the Lotus Elise conversion proved to be a fluster-cuck didn't mean it was not an attempt to make an electric Elise.

I have a racing truck. It has a GMC steel body, original type engine and trans. How many parts were pure GMC? Let's see...
Not the Cab/Bed/Doors/Engine/Trans/Driveshaft/Wheels/Interior/Cluster/ECM/Harness/Tank/etc.
Now I didn't make everything from scratch, what I did was adapt GMC parts for competition use. It would have been easier to start from a tube frame, but that was against the rulebook.

How many parts of the Elise were modified for use on the Roadster project? Probably all of them.

What puzzles me is why they bothered. Just start with a tube chassis, and glass body, and shop out of race catalogs. It should not have even looked similar. What happened instead was they took what they thought was a logical shortcut and got bit in the arse. It was a bad decision by rookies. There was no rulebook forcing them into a corner.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,416 Posts
Just because the Lotus Elise conversion proved to be a fluster-cuck didn't mean it was not an attempt to make an electric Elise.

I have a racing truck. It has a GMC steel body, original type engine and trans. How many parts were pure GMC? Let's see...
Not the Cab/Bed/Doors/Engine/Trans/Driveshaft/Wheels/Interior/Cluster/ECM/Harness/Tank/etc.
Now I didn't make everything from scratch, what I did was adapt GMC parts for competition use. It would have been easier to start from a tube frame, but that was against the rulebook.

How many parts of the Elise were modified for use on the Roadster project? Probably all of them.

What puzzles me is why they bothered. Just start with a tube chassis, and glass body, and shop out of race catalogs. It should not have even looked similar. What happened instead was they took what they thought was a logical shortcut and got bit in the arse. It was a bad decision by rookies. There was no rulebook forcing them into a corner.
https://www.tesla.com/blog/mythbusters-part-2-tesla-roadster-not-converted-lotus-elise

The Roadster was developed by Tesla to mass-produce AC Propulsion's tzero concept car.


On 11 July 2005, Tesla and British sports car maker Lotus entered an agreement about products and services based on the Lotus Elise, where Lotus provided advice on designing and developing a vehicle as well as producing partly assembled vehicles, and amended in 2009, helped with basic chassis development. The Roadster has a parts overlap of roughly 6 percent with the Lotus Elise, a 2-inch longer wheelbase, and a slightly stiffer chassis according to Eberhard. Tesla's designers chose to construct the body panels using resin transfer molded carbon fiber composite to minimize weight; this choice makes the Roadster one of the least expensive cars with an entirely carbon fiber skin.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla_Roadster
 
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
Top