4 ms·

Consumers of the truck don't care. The car and the price has to make sense. Just making it "electric" is not good enough. If it charges longer, is heavier, or h

by rdtsc 3y ago

Consumers of the truck don't care. The car and the price has to make sense. Just making it "electric" is not good enough. If it charges longer, is heavier, or has reduced range or towing capacity, it better be a lot cheaper to operate/insure or have other pluses to compensate. If it doesn't people won't buy it.

saagarjha 3y ago
Consumers of the truck overwhelmingly buy it because it looks like a truck, not because they actually have any need for a truck. Not entirely sure they care about the price making sense.
- rdtsc 3y ago
  But it’s a heavier, more expensive and taking longer to “refuel” truck. Even people who buy it and rarely use it for towing or hauling stuff like to at least imagine themselves doing it. But, yeah, I electric cars are cool, and sometimes are people splurging for that feature, but I don’t see it for consumers traditionally buying trucks. If anything it’s an anti-feature almost for them.
  - thebruce87m 3y ago
    It doesn’t take longer to refuel necessarily, for those that charge at home and only do rare 200+ mile trips they will actually save time. Since I got my home charger 3 months ago I’ve spent the same amount of time “waiting” on my mobile phone charging as my car - none. Probably close to an hour saved at petrol stations over the same period.
    - rdtsc 3y ago
      That's a fair point. Yeah, I agree those that can charge it at home or a at a depot (for a fleet) this could make sense.
benj111 3y ago
You aren't answering the parents question. You're talking about value to the consumer, the parent is talking about expense to manufacture. I'm still not sure what the gp is referring to. They could be making a moral argument as far as I can work out.
- rdtsc 3y ago
  Consumers don’t care if it’s batteries that are expensive or the motor or the paint. The product is too expensive for them overall. Unless it is a monopoly and they have to have a truck and the only option is the electric f-150, they are going to buy something else. Sure, if Ford still wanted to sell them they could find a way to make cheaper batteries or sell at a loss for a while.
  - benj111 3y ago
    >Sure, if Ford still wanted to sell them they could find a way to make cheaper batteries You've already accepted that ford doesn't have a monopoly, so assuming we're agreed on the same basic tenets of free market capitalism they do want to sell them, and are already trying to find ways to make batteries cheaper. You can't just hand wave away all that complexity. Just because EVs aren't as cheap as you personally think they should be, doesn't mean ford isn't trying.

by rdtsc 3y ago

saagarjha 3y ago

Consumers of the truck overwhelmingly buy it because it looks like a truck, not because they actually have any need for a truck. Not entirely sure they care about the price making sense.

rdtsc 3y ago
But it’s a heavier, more expensive and taking longer to “refuel” truck. Even people who buy it and rarely use it for towing or hauling stuff like to at least imagine themselves doing it. But, yeah, I electric cars are cool, and sometimes are people splurging for that feature, but I don’t see it for consumers traditionally buying trucks. If anything it’s an anti-feature almost for them.
- thebruce87m 3y ago
  It doesn’t take longer to refuel necessarily, for those that charge at home and only do rare 200+ mile trips they will actually save time. Since I got my home charger 3 months ago I’ve spent the same amount of time “waiting” on my mobile phone charging as my car - none. Probably close to an hour saved at petrol stations over the same period.
  - rdtsc 3y ago
    That's a fair point. Yeah, I agree those that can charge it at home or a at a depot (for a fleet) this could make sense.

benj111 3y ago

You aren't answering the parents question. You're talking about value to the consumer, the parent is talking about expense to manufacture. I'm still not sure what the gp is referring to. They could be making a moral argument as far as I can work out.

rdtsc 3y ago
Consumers don’t care if it’s batteries that are expensive or the motor or the paint. The product is too expensive for them overall. Unless it is a monopoly and they have to have a truck and the only option is the electric f-150, they are going to buy something else. Sure, if Ford still wanted to sell them they could find a way to make cheaper batteries or sell at a loss for a while.
- benj111 3y ago
  >Sure, if Ford still wanted to sell them they could find a way to make cheaper batteries You've already accepted that ford doesn't have a monopoly, so assuming we're agreed on the same basic tenets of free market capitalism they do want to sell them, and are already trying to find ways to make batteries cheaper. You can't just hand wave away all that complexity. Just because EVs aren't as cheap as you personally think they should be, doesn't mean ford isn't trying.