3 ms·
Sure, but I think his point is about perception. The GM brand is every bit as ugly and even if they rebadged a Tesla and sold it (or maybe an iPod) it would be
by jsight 10y ago
Sure, but I think his point is about perception. The GM brand is every bit as ugly and even if they rebadged a Tesla and sold it (or maybe an iPod) it would be perceived poorly.
- refulgentis 10y agoIs it about the brand, or is about the challenges established market participants face when they're disrupted? I.e. Microsoft reacting to the iPad by trying to compromise and maintain two UIs for Windows, or GM reacting to EVs by maintaining two power trains? GM's decision is defensible IMHO, anecdotally, one of the major concerns around EVs is the "What happens when I run out of energy in the middle of nowhere?", and GM's approach answers that question handily. It's also shipping today at a price point Tesla can't hit. Engineering purity and the absurd performance a pure EV power train can hit aren't very relevant to the mass market.
- dragonwriter 10y ago> GM reacting to EVs by maintaining two power trains? GM wasn't reacting to EVs (except, perhaps, to GM's own experience with them); when the Volt was announced (as an EV), it was as a "better" alternative to hybrids. And for years, the "coming soon" Volt was what Chevy was waving around when other companies were actually delivering hybrids.
- incongruity 10y agoRemember HP did actually have the only license for iPods (the whole iPod + HP thing – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPod%2BHP https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPod%2BHP) and it went nowhere. Their brand didn't do anything for it and the deal ended quickly, never to be repeated by Apple.