The problem with that line of thinking is, that while your proposition ("[...] people would be attracted to [...] inexpensive cars [...]") is likely correct, th

The problem with that line of thinking is, that while your proposition ("[...] people would be attracted to [...] inexpensive cars [...]") is likely correct, that's not an offer that is possible to make. The luxurious cars you talk about have _half_ their value in their battery. Even if you strip out any profit, and get by with a quarter of the range of a Tesla, even then it won't be 10x cheaper. And everything in that scenario is insane: The no profit part is obvious, but even the 4x less range is insane (as in it doesn't cover the daily commute safely anymore). Because 4x less range does not give you a 25% battery, because there is some overhead (mainly heating). On the other hand you have huge amounts of money sunk into the tooling around "classic" cars, that investment is being financed both over a lot of generations and an insane number of cars. That being said: Cheaper EVs are coming. Both from a production point of view (battery costs decrease, more tooling and ultimately capacity is being build up), but also from an market point of view as the secondary market of EVs is just starting to come alive (it's only now that used and new EVs start to differ meaningfully in price) and also from a purely economic point of view in the sense that EVs are far cheaper to operate, so they don't _actually_ need to be price competitive at point of sale